On Tue, 04 Jan 2000 23:38:27 GMT, Sam wrote:
>> Nonconformance with archaic very US-centric part of rfc. Anyone in a
>
>I wouldn't describe all of RFCs 2045-2048 as "archaic".
>
>RFC 821 is certainly not archaic, and it has a blanked prohibition against
I didn't adress the entire rfc, only said that this part of rfc821 et
al (like the restriction of the size of reciplocal) is archaic. How
would you describe it?
>RFC 2045-2048 *is* the right way to do this. In fact, strictly-conformant
>servers have every right to reject 8bit mail that is not received with the
>8BITMIME extension.
It violates the more important rule to be lenient on accept. The only
reason to reject a 8-bit message [for that reason] is an inability to
handle it.
Still, you are correct, just not right ;-)
-Sincerely, Fred
(Frederik Lindberg, Infectious Diseases, WashU, St. Louis, MO, USA)
